Should children be required to attend school past the age of 16? The debate on whether to impose school going children to on schooling past the age of 16 has attracted different reactions from different stakeholders in the sector. The proponents of the arguments hold that through giving children beyond sixteen a chance to go on with the education, those from low class in society are given an opportunity to improve their lives. I also believe that children should be required to attend school past the age of 16 years as it improves their position in society, reduces chances of juvenile delinquency, and improves the competitiveness of a state in the international levels.
Diepenbrock-Kansas notes that through raising the minimum level of schooling, the minimum bottom end is lifted by default thereby increasing levels of equality (“Futurity”). That is why the government through the Senate Education Committee approved measures to raise the dropout age for students from 16 to 18 (Friedman “NJ Advance Media”). The government’s role in raising the dropout age is intended to facilitate more learners to stay at school to improve their lives through giving them a better understanding of life through education. “Times News” also notes that it did not make much sense when decades ago people foresaw it reasonable to allow teenagers to leave school at young age. Although there some house chores that required the parents to be helped by children at home, there was no clear evidence that having students at 14 years stay at home was beneficial. In reality, an education population was more productive and less likely to be involved in trouble in society or with the law.
McFarland, Jiashan, and Jiashan further argue that early school dropout is related to some adverse outcomes (1). At school, the children are managed and monitored by teachers which reduces their chances of committing offenses whereas when at home they lack that supervision thereby increasing their chances of doing wrong. Improving the social life is critical as it also improves the economic situation of the society. However, Sheldon and Mathews argue that although the effects of raising the school leaving age do not imply any prospects in the job market, there are chances of economic improvement. Thus, school children should be required to attend school past the age of 16 years to improve their lives in future, lower social crimes, and improve the economic standards of a society.
Works Cited
Diepenbrock-Kansas, George. “Report calls for state laws to keep kids in school until age 18.” Futurity, 24 May 2014, www.futurity.org/compulsory-education-age-18-equlity
Friedman, Matt. “N.J. Assembly panel approves bill raising minimum school dropout age to 18.” NJ Advance Media for NJ.com, 24 Feb. 2012, ww.nj.com/news/index.ssf/2012/02/nj_assembly_panel_approves_bil_2.html
Is it time to rethink the dropout age?”, Time News, 16 Nov. 2012, www.thetimesnews.com/20121116/is-it-time-to-rethink-the-dropout-age/311169787
McFarland, Patrick Stark, and Jiashan, Joel, and Jiashan, Https://Nces.ed.gov/pubs2016/2016117rev.Pdf.” Trends in High School Dropout and Completion Rates in the United States: 2013.
Sheldon, Nicola and David Matthews. “The school leaving age: what can we learn from history?”, BBC History Magazine, 13 Aug. 2012, http://m.historyextra.com/feature/school-leaving-age-what-can-we-learn-history.
